Introduction

Developing and revising one’s identity is a lifelong task, but the processes involved in adult identity development are less understood than those in adolescence and emerging adulthood (Fadjukoff & Kroger, 2016; Kroger et al., 2010). An individual’s identity development both influences and is influenced by significant others in their social context, especially their family of origin and their parents (Erikson, 1968; Scabini & Manzi, 2011). Previous research has found that for emerging adults, different approaches to identity formation have been associated with qualitatively different ways of relating to one’s parents (e.g., Koepke & Denissen, 2012; Kroger, 2003). However, little is known about the role parents play in continued identity development in adulthood. In this study, we will address this gap in the literature by examining changes in how established adults (Mehta et al., 2020) describe and relate to their parents in their identity narratives as they progress from identity foreclosure (at age 29) to identity achievement (at age 33).

Development in Established Adulthood

In regard to developed countries, established adulthood (around ages 30–45) has been proposed as the next life stage after emerging adulthood, a stage defined by greater stability, responsibility, and demands in both work and family life (Mehta et al., 2020). In Sweden, where this study is situated, it is during the early stages of established adulthood that most people finish higher education and enter the job market, get married, and become parents (Ekonomifakta, 2018; Statistics Sweden, 2020, 2023). The increased responsibilities in relation to others that are associated with these transitions may limit one’s possibilities for self-focus and exploration during this phase of life (Arnett, 2015). At the same time, taking on adult roles such as that of spouse or parent may require individuals to adjust their previous views about themselves, and some may start feeling trapped in commitments they realize are not what they want in the long term, a realization that can stimulate renewed identity exploration (Pals, 1999; Robinson, 2015). The challenges associated with meeting the often competing demands of family and work life, as well as with establishing oneself in society, make established adulthood interesting from an identity perspective (Levinson, 1986; Mehta et al., 2020). Yet, this developmental phase is much less understood than those of adolescence and emerging adulthood, which have been the focus of the majority of previous identity research (Fadjukoff & Kroger, 2016).

Establishing oneself as an adult may also mean establishing a new kind of relationship with one’s parents. Achieving independence from one’s parents is regarded by young people in a wide range of cultural contexts as a hallmark of becoming fully adult (Arnett, 2015). Changes in power dynamics may allow one to see who the other is beyond their role as parent or child, resulting in a more equal and amicable relationship (Arnett, 2015). However, cultures differ in their emphasis on independence and interdependence as ideals for adult functioning (Markus & Kitayama, 1991), and social policies may influence how much adult children and their parents depend on each other for practical and financial help (e.g., Bordone et al., 2017; Brandt & Deindl, 2013). In cross-cultural comparisons, Sweden has been characterized by individualistic beliefs and values, meaning that individual freedom is prioritized over conformity and obligations to social groups, including family (Davis & Williamson, 2020). Moreover, the extensive Swedish welfare system allow established adults to live their lives independently from their parents, as the state provide paid parental leave and public childcare (Bordone et al., 2017; Brandt & Deindl, 2013; Szydlik, 2016). Although dependence and duty are not emphasized in relationships between Swedish adults and their parents, family is generally considered important (Montoro-Gurich & Garcia-Vivar, 2019), and over 90% of Swedish parents of adult children report at least weekly contact, which tends to increase if the children have children of their own (Bordone, 2009; Szydlik, 2016). Given established adults’ relative independence from their parents, especially in individualistic contexts such as Sweden, it is interesting to examine what role, if any, parents play in established adults’ identity development.

The Identity Status Model

Marcia’s (1966) identity status model is one of the dominant approaches to studying identity development (McLean & Syed, 2015). Based on Erikson’s (1950) theory of identity, Marcia (1966) defined exploration and commitment as two processes that are fundamental to identity development. Exploration involves actively reflecting upon and trying out different options in life areas that are important to the individual while commitment refers to the process of defining one’s values, goals, and beliefs in these areas and actively striving to live by them (Marcia et al., 1993). When assessing identity status through the Ego Identity Status Interview, the individual is categorized into one of four statuses based on the degree of exploration and commitment expressed in their interview: identity diffusion (low commitment, low exploration), foreclosure (high commitment, low exploration), moratorium (low commitment, high exploration), and identity achievement (high commitment, high exploration; Marcia, 1966; Marcia et al., 1993). These statuses are thought to represent different modes of addressing the psychosocial task of forming an adult identity (Kroger, 2015).

This study focuses specifically on established adults who have transitioned from the foreclosed to the achieved identity status, and the reason for this is twofold. First, by examining this specific identity status transition, we can understand more about the processes involved in progressive identity development in adulthood, as it has been suggested that optimal identity status development from adolescence to adulthood should include exploration leading up to commitments, resulting in a progressive movement toward identity achievement (Waterman, 1999). Empirical studies do show that the proportion of individuals coded to identity achievement increases with age, but also that some do not reach identity achievement until their mid-thirties, if at all (Eriksson et al., 2020; Fadjukoff et al., 2016; Kroger et al., 2010). It is thus evident that identity development as captured by the identity status model takes place beyond the adolescent years (Kroger, 2015).

The second reason for focusing on the progression from foreclosure to achievement is that this identity status transition should theoretically include shifts in the way individuals relate to internalized representations of their parents (Marcia, 1964, 1966, 1967). The foreclosed identity status is characterized by establishing identity commitments without much previous exploration of alternatives; instead, commitments may originate from identification with authority figures (e.g., teachers and parents) during childhood (Kroger & Marcia, 2011; Marcia et al., 1993). Progressing from foreclosure to achievement entails going through a period of identity exploration in which the individual should evaluate, reformulate, and integrate these identifications into commitments that are in line with the individual’s own strengths and with societal demands, thus becoming more individuated from their parents or parental figures (Marcia, 1964; Marcia et al., 1993). As described in more detail below, previous research has found associations between processes related to identity status development and how adolescents and emerging adults view and relate to their parents (Koepke & Denissen, 2012). However, few studies have empirically examined how these processes manifest in adulthood. Moreover, given that the identity status model was initially created to capture the development of late adolescents, and that the relationship with one’s parents differs markedly among adolescents compared to adults, it is likely that parental influences play a different role when one is transitioning from identity foreclosure into identity achievement in established adulthood (Marcia et al., 1993). This study will thus address this gap in the literature by examining whether, and if so how, parental representations play a part in this identity status transition beyond adolescence and emerging adulthood.

Parental Influences on Identity Development

The family of origin provides a unique relationship context that influences individual identity development through processes operating at both an interpersonal and an individual level (Scabini & Manzi, 2011). At the interpersonal level, identity development is influenced by, for example, the societal values and norms communicated by parents to children, as well as by family dynamics and parenting practices that can promote or hinder individual identity processes (Koepke & Denissen, 2012; Schachter & Ventura, 2008). In the present study, we look at the individual level at which the family context and parental influences may play a role in identity development. Previous research at this level has focused primarily on how the individual develops their sense of self through internal processes of separation and individuation. This literature will be reviewed below.

According to individuation theory, a sense of self develops through a process of separation-individuation that initially starts in infancy when the young child internalizes representations of their parents, which offer security and behavioral guidance in the absence of the actual parents (Kroger, 1998; Mahler et al., 1984). In adolescence and emerging adulthood, the individual needs to separate and differentiate from these internal parental representations in order to gain an increasing sense of independence and distinctiveness from others; this has been described as the second separation-individuation process (Blos, 1967; Kroger, 1998). Several authors have emphasized that healthy individuation does not equal distance from one’s parents; rather, it should be viewed as a process of balancing the individual’s need for separateness with their need for connectedness (e.g., Allison & Sabatelli, 1988; Josselson, 1988; Smollar & Youniss, 1989). How the individuation process is navigated and the level of separateness that individuals strive for depends on multiple factors including the disposition and needs of the young person as well their parents’ response to their efforts to gain greater autonomy (Koepke & Denissen, 2012). Individuation may thus involve both separation from and connection with one’s parents, and the process of individuation is considered to be intimately linked to processes of identity development.

Previous research on emerging adults has generally supported theoretical claims regarding the relationship between individuation and identity, showing that the identity statuses are associated with qualitatively different forms of relating to internal representations of one’s parents (e.g., Koepke & Denissen, 2012; Kroger, 2003). The foreclosed status has been linked to low levels of differentiation between self and others, including overidentification with one’s parents (Johnson et al., 2003), idealization of them, relatively low levels of autonomy, and feelings of insecurity about one’s relationship with them (Frank et al., 1990). Conversely, the identity achievement status has been related to having a more clearly defined sense of self (Johnson et al., 2003) as well as being more autonomous from one’s parents, viewing them more realistically, and feeling more secure about one’s relationship with them (Frank et al., 1990). In studies analyzing early memories, foreclosed individuals tended to express themes of experiencing or seeking security, closeness, and trust in significant others (e.g., their parents), while identity achieved individuals combined themes of connection to others with themes of individual pursuits and mastery (Josselson, 1982; Kroger, 1990; Orlofsky & Frank, 1986). Results from these, and other, early memory studies have been interpreted as indicating that the identity achievement status represents an increasingly complex and differentiated model of self-other representation (Kroger, 2003). However, it is unknown whether these findings translate to established adults.

Separation-individuation has been defined as a lifelong process, and it has been suggested that a third individuation takes place in adulthood as the individual faces life transitions (e.g., marriage, parenthood, establishing oneself in the workplace) that force them to alter internal representations of the self as well as of important others (Allison & Sabatelli, 1988; Colarusso, 2000). Yet, empirical studies on individuation processes beyond emerging adulthood are scarce. In a previous study that is part of the same longitudinal project as this one, it was found that transitioning from identity diffusion at age 29 to foreclosure at age 33 in the romantic identity domain involved relating views on romantic relationships to the views and behavior of one’s parents and emphasizing similarities between oneself and one’s parents more than before (Larsson et al., 2020). In her study of women’s identity development, Josselson (1996) observed that the women who were assessed as foreclosed in their twenties usually did not reassess their views of themselves or their families of origin until their thirties or forties after having encountered some major shift in their lives. In the process of reworking their identity following such a shift, the women began to acknowledge more sides of themselves as well as their families of origin, and to choose more freely what to take with them from their upbringing and what to leave behind. In another study focused on the continued development of individuals in foreclosure, Kroger (2003) suggested based on case study work that the transition from foreclosure via moratorium to achievement in adulthood can involve a sequence of steps including separation from an internalized other and a rejection of childhood identifications followed by a focus on individuation, resulting in a new sense of differentiation from and connection with others. Thus, taken together, previous research indicates that identity development in established adulthood may involve changes in one’s views on and relationship with one’s parents. However, there is a need for further studies that move beyond individual case studies, examining how processes related to identity and individuation manifest among individuals progressing from identity foreclosure to identity achievement.

The Present Study

The aim of this study was to examine changes in how established adults describe and relate to internal representations of their parents in their identity narratives as they progress from identity foreclosure (at age 29) to identity achievement (at age 33). Using a qualitative longitudinal methodology, we analyzed narratives from Ego Identity Status Interviews with individuals who had transitioned from a foreclosed to an achieved identity status (Marcia, 1966; Marcia et al., 1993). As our interest lies in intraindividual processes of identity development, we focus on the participants’ subjective representations of their parents as expressed in the interviews, rather than their real-life relationship with them.

Method

The present study is part of the Gothenburg Longitudinal Study of Development (GoLD) and uses data from waves 9 and 10 of the project when the participants were 29 and 33 years old, respectively. At both waves, the participants were interviewed and assessed for identity status using the Ego Identity Status Interview (Marcia, 1966; Marcia et al., 1993). The identity status interviews were analyzed in two steps for this study. First, following guidelines outlined by Marcia et al. (1993), identity status was coded based on the level of exploration and commitment expressed by the participants in the interview. The identity status coding was then used to select our sample consisting of individuals coded as foreclosed at age 29 and as identity achieved at age 33. Second, the identity status interviews were analyzed again and this time coded inductively for changes in how these participants described and related to internal representations of their parents by comparing their interviews as foreclosed (age 29) and as achieved (age 33). This second coding was not carried out in relation to Marcias’s framework. A detailed description of our method is provided.

Participants

GoLD started in 1982 with a community sample of 144 one- to two-year-olds from Gothenburg, Sweden (Broberg et al., 1990). The participants were recruited from waiting lists for childcare services in all areas of the city, and the sample was largely representative of families in the city in terms of parental age and socioeconomic status (Lamb et al., 1988). At the time of recruitment, all of the children were living with both parents (Broberg & Hwang, 1987). One hundred and eighteen individuals (81.9% of the original sample) participated in both waves 9 and 10 of GoLD. The sample included in this study consists of all participants coded as identity foreclosed at wave 9 and as identity achieved at wave 10 (N = 18; nine women, nine men). These participants were 28 to 30 years old (M = 29.4 years, SD = 0.6) at wave 9 and 33 to 34 years old (M = 33.4 years, SD = 0.5) at wave 10. Background information on the participants included in this study, each referred to by a pseudonym, is presented in Table 1.

Table 1 Descriptive information concerning each participant’s occupational status and family situation at ages 29 and 33
Full size table

Interviews

Background Interview

A structured background interview, performed at both waves of data collection, included questions regarding the participants’ occupational status and family situation.

Ego Identity Status Interview

The Ego Identity Status Interview has a semi-structured format, and includes questions and probes aimed at uncovering the processes of exploration and commitment in various identity domains (Marcia, 1966; Marcia et al., 1993). Based on the degree of exploration and commitment expressed by the participants, they were assigned to one of four identity statuses: achievement (high exploration, high commitment), foreclosure (low exploration, high commitment), moratorium (high exploration, low commitment), or diffusion (low exploration, low commitment). For this study, we used a version of the Ego Identity Status Interview that had been translated to Swedish and adapted to Swedish conditions (Frisén & Wängqvist, 2011), and that included the domains occupation, romantic relationships, parenthood, and work–family priorities. Each interview domain included questions regarding the participant’s parents, such as “How would you compare your thoughts to those of your parents?,” “In what way have your parents influenced you?,” and “What would you like to do similar to/different from them?,” as well as follow-up probes. Statements relating to the parents, however, were also commonly expressed in response to more open-ended questions, such as “What do you think has influenced your way of thinking?.”

Procedure

Before both waves of data collection, the participants were given information about the project by letter and were thereafter contacted by telephone or e-mail. The purpose of the project was described as examining psychological development during the early stages of adulthood focusing for example on identity development. The participants were compensated for their participation with a book and voucher for two movie tickets or two scratch cards. Most of those who agreed to participate were interviewed at the Department of Psychology at the University of Gothenburg. Those not able or willing to come to the university were interviewed in other locations of their choice. A few participants who were unable to meet face-to-face were interviewed via telephone or video link. The interviews were carried out by members of the research team who had undergone training in performing and coding the Ego Identity Status Interview. At wave 9, the interviewers were three doctoral students and two master’s students in clinical psychology. At wave 10, the interviewers consisted of three post-doctoral researchers, one doctoral student, and one research assistant with a master’s degree in clinical psychology. Global identity status assessments were performed for each participant following the guidelines outlined by Marcia et al. (1993). For a detailed description of the assessment process, see Eriksson et al. (2020). To ensure reliability, a random sample of 20 interviews were coded by a second research team member at both waves of data collection. The exact agreements for global identity status were 85.0% at wave 9 with a kappa of 0.72 (Carlsson et al., 2015), and 95.0% at wave 10 with a kappa of 0.89 (Gyberg & Frisén, 2017). If the assessments of the first and second coders differed, the original assessment by the first coder (who had interviewed the participant) was used. All interviews included in the qualitative analysis were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. These interviews ranged between 19 and 116 min (M = 52 min) at wave 9 and 29–73 min (M = 50 min) at wave 10.

Analysis

The interview transcripts from participants coded as progressing from foreclosure (at age 29) to identity achievement (at age 33) were analyzed using a longitudinal qualitative methodology. In order to examine the participants’ individual development over time and to describe shared patterns of development across cases, we chose to combine a case study approach (Willig, 2013) with reflexive thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2022). We approached our data with an experiential orientation (Braun & Clarke, 2022) as we wanted to understand the subjective meaning of the participants’ parental representations for their development. In line with a critical realist position (Braun & Clarke, 2022), we analyzed changes in the participants’ descriptions of their parents as reflecting changes in psychological processes while acknowledging that these descriptions, and our understanding of them, are situated interpretations mediated through language and culture (e.g., norms about the parent–child relationship in 21st-century Sweden).

The analytic process contained the six phases of thematic analysis outlined by Braun and Clarke (2022), but was adapted to fit the longitudinal case-based design of the study. The analysis was led by the first author, who continuously discussed and audited analytical procedures as well as interpretations of the data with the second author. The analysis began with the development of case summaries for each participant. This step involved familiarization with the data by reading the two interviews for each participant separately and highlighting all extracts in which they mentioned their parents. The highlighted extracts were then coded inductively, focusing on the participant’s own description of their parents and their parents’ influence on their development (i.e., semantic level). Finally, similarities and differences in codes between the two interviews were summarized for each participant and labeled with new codes.

After developing case summaries, we moved on to the phase of generating initial themes by looking at the entire set of interviews and case summaries. In this phase, codes that described change between the interview occasions, and extracts supporting these codes, were clustered into preliminary themes describing aspects of change in how the participants described and related to parental representations in their narratives. This was done through an iterative process whereby a preliminary thematic structure was continuously evaluated and adjusted to fit the data as more cases were added to the analysis. The final thematic structure was reviewed in relation to each case as well as the entire set of interviews to ensure that it represented the data, resulting in minor revisions. The themes were then refined, summarized, named, and illustrated with extracts from the participants. The extracts were translated from Swedish to English by the first author with the assistance of the AI-driven translation program DeepL (https://www.deepl.com/translator).

An integral part of reflexive thematic analysis is critically reflecting on the researcher’s impact on knowledge production (Braun & Clarke, 2022). Both authors are licensed clinical psychologists and researchers within the field of developmental psychology. The first author is a doctoral student writing her thesis based on data from the longitudinal project that this study is part of, and the second author is the PI of the project. In this study, reflexive practices included the first author keeping a research journal in which she reflected on design choices and assumptions (personal, theoretical, and disciplinary) and how they impacted interpretations of the data. Meetings between the first and second authors provided another opportunity for discussions around these issues. A central question that was raised concerned how to manage our pre-existing knowledge about the participants’ identity status development from foreclosure to achievement, knowledge that could potentially shape our interpretations of changes in their parental representations. Another issue we became aware of was how our background in clinical and developmental psychology as well as norms in our cultural context (majority population in Sweden) had influenced our assumptions about what constitutes “good” or “adaptive” relationships between adults and their parents. Reflecting on these issues, we decided that we wanted to use our subjectivity (e.g., knowledge about identity status theory) as a resource in making sense of the participants’ accounts, but would be explicit about the theoretical framework and cultural context our findings were situated within. At the same time, in line with our experiential orientation to the data, we wanted the analysis to be firmly grounded in the participants’ accounts. To this end, we started our analysis with an open mind, initially looking for changes of any kind (which could be interpreted as either progressive or regressive) as well as stability in parental representation. Later in the analytic process, we also kept track of our coding in a table displaying which participants were coded to each theme and in which interview domains. This table was not intended to be a quantitative measure of the validity of our interpretations; rather, it was used as a tool to prevent our interpretations from drifting too far from the data and to aid reflection on patterns in the data.

Results

The longitudinal qualitative analysis of changes in how established adults describe and relate to internal representations of their parents in their identity narratives as they progress from identity foreclosure to identity achievement resulted in three themes: Making more reflective comparisons between oneself and one’s parents; Seeing the persons behind the parents; and Finding greater independence in relation to one’s parents. These themes are described below, along with interview excerpts. All participant names are pseudonyms, and potentially identifying information in the excerpts has been omitted or altered.

Making More Reflective Comparisons between Oneself and One’s Parents

This theme describes the participants’ development toward reflecting more on similarities and differences between themselves and their parents at age 33 when they had transitioned to the identity achievement status. At age 29, when coded as foreclosed, the participants generally made fewer comparisons between themselves and their parents than at 33, with some struggling to compare themselves to their parents at all. Moreover, the comparisons they made at age 29 were often quite unspecific, for example stating that they were similar to or different from their parents without elaborating on what these similarities/differences were, or were focused on surface-level commonalities. After progressing to the identity achievement status at age 33, the participants tended to make more comparisons between themselves and their parents, seen most notably in comparisons involving differences between them and their parents. We also saw changes in the quality of the comparisons toward becoming more elaborate and reflective. This development was for example observed in the participant Andreas who was in the same committed romantic relationship at ages 29 and 33, while his parents had separated during the time between the interviews. Comparing the following two extracts from his first and second interview illustrates a shift toward making more reflective comparisons between his thoughts about romantic relationships to those of his parents:

Andreas: Um, similar. Or the same thoughts.

Interviewer: Can you give an example, describe it a bit?

Andreas: Well, they also met quite [young] or when they were like 20 and got married and had two children. So, they’re probably on the same wavelength if you will, as I am or as we are. Absolutely. And that’s probably where you get it from too, kind of indirectly. (Andreas, age 29)

My mother has wanted to be at home quite a lot […] and just sit on the couch and my father has wanted to be out and they haven’t planned things together, or anything like that, and that’s what made them divorce too, I think. If they were going to travel somewhere, it was often like “yes, but you’ll have to arrange that” and then he sat and like made reservations and then when they finally left, she was unhappy because it was like a strange hotel or it was far from the center or something. But then you have to get involved in it and like be interested if that’s the case. So, I guess the lesson is that, but we do it too, we plan things together or whatever. Which they didn’t. (Andreas, age 33)

The development seen among the participants toward making more elaborate comparisons involved providing more specific examples of how they were similar/dissimilar to their parents or what they wanted to do like them/different from them. These examples could range from concerning fundamental similarities and differences in personality, values, and beliefs to more concrete aspects of everyday life, such as how to divide household labor between oneself and one’s partner or choices concerning childcare.

For some participants, the comparisons they made between themselves and their parents at age 33 also seemed more closely connected to their views about themselves, compared to before. For these participants, reflecting on similarities and differences between themselves and their parents seemed to help them define their identity. These reflective comparisons could be used to define the participants in multiple ways. For example, some described their parents as representing opposing ways of being or thinking, and reflected on their own position in relation to these extremes that their parents represented. This could include defining themselves as more similar to one parent than the other, expressing a wish to find a balance between the differing perspectives of their parents, or reflecting on how their identity contained a mix of elements from both parents as illustrated in the following extract from Gustav. For Gustav, becoming a parent during the time between the interviews seemed to have made him more aware of the similarities he shared with both of his parents:

Gustav: Well, I’m very similar to my parents now, I notice more and more, actually. I’m very much like my father and my sister’s very much like my mother. So I don’t know, I guess I feel like I don’t have that much [in common] with my mother at the moment. I mean, we’re pretty different now, while my dad and I are alike. It’s become more and more noticeable, you know. Before, I felt very much in sync with my mom, like the same ideas about life and everything, but I don’t know. She’s changed and I’ve changed […]

Interviewer: So you’re very different in many ways.

Gustav: Yes we are, we’re very different actually. But I’ve probably gotten a bit from her too, as I said. A bit, you recognize yourself in her in some way.

Interviewer: What is it that you can recognize yourself in?

Gustav: Well, that I’m quite open; she’s very open, my mother, and like warm and kind, so a bit of that – my father’s very shy. So, I’ve probably gotten a bit of this social side from my mother and a bit of Dad’s calmness and so on. The mix. But it’s also something I’ve been thinking about a lot lately since I had children. How it is, well, how the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree and all that. I’m quite similar to my father.

Other participants used the comparisons with their parents at age 33 to highlight their own individuality, describing how they were different from their parents in various ways. At both interviews, Ellinor was committed to her career in a demanding field of work and like Gustav, she had become a parent during the time between interviews and was at the time of the second interview expecting her second child. Balancing parenthood with her professional commitments seemed to have clarified a fundamental difference between herself and her parents regarding how her career was more important to her identity than had been the case for her parents:

Well, my father’s had his own business but I can’t remember him working that much really. He has of course worked hard and developed a great business and so on, but I haven’t felt like he was never around; he was present [as a parent]. And especially my mother was [...] I believe that my mother’s committed herself to parenting in a different way than I’m willing to do.

As illustrated in these extracts, at age 33, making reflective comparisons between themselves and their parents seemed to help the participants shed light on, clarify, and make sense of different aspects of themselves and their lives in a way that was not as evident at age 29 when they were coded as foreclosed.

Seeing the Persons Behind the Parents

This theme describes a development toward the participants seeing more of their parents’ individuality and being more understanding of them at age 33 when coded as identity achieved compared to age 29 when coded as foreclosed. At 29, some participants had trouble describing their parents’ views and choices in different areas of life, as well as reasoning about the motives behind them. In contrast, at 33, they described their parents’ views and choices in greater detail and seemed to put more effort into trying to understand them and their points of view. These changes made their parents come across as more three-dimensional than before, possessing both good and bad qualities. Stina had been in therapy during the time between the interviews and expressed that this experience had made her reevaluate her previously quite idealized views on her parents. She had also come to the decision that she did not want to become a parent herself. The following extracts where she reflects on her parents’ views on parenting, as foreclosed and as achieved, illustrate this development:

Well, I think they think like me, because I have a lot that I’ve taken from what they did [as parents]. But then I don’t know if they thought about it when they did it, if they really planned it or if they just did it the way they [did it]. Well, they probably didn’t think about it that much, I think. (Stina, age 29)

Stina: Maybe he didn’t have room for it in his life; I mean, because his energy is like, it wasn’t enough for anything more […] when my older sister was going to have a child he said “No, don’t have children, that’s the biggest mistake I’ve made!” – [laughs] he tells his children! That’s not really [interrupted by interviewer]

Interviewer: That must have been hard to hear, I mean that…?

Stina: Yeah, but you’ve sort of sensed it, maybe, that he didn’t have that patience and that it may have been a lot to do with my mother wanting children and that he, well, that it just turned out that way, and that it may not have been that well thought through. (Stina, age 33)

As seen in Stina’s extract from age 33, she provides several possible explanations for her father’s sentiments about having children, and in contrast to her extract from age 29, she seems to try more actively to make sense of his views. This development was evident among the participants, who reflected more on possible reasons behind their parents’ views and choices at the second interview. Some of the factors mentioned as potential explanations included generational differences, experiences from their parents’ childhood, or, as mentioned by Stina, their parents’ personalities.

Another aspect of the development toward seeing more of the persons behind the parents involved referring to their parents more often as two separate individuals with their own thoughts and feelings. At age 29, some participants would talk about their parents mainly in terms of “they,” depicting them as a unit representing the same types of views and values. The shift in language toward speaking of them as individuals enabled the participants to describe their parents from an insider’s perspective, thus adding more psychological depth and complexity to their descriptions. For example, when speaking about how she came to be a doctor, at both interviews Jenny mentioned that her parents had been strong proponents of this line of work. However, at age 33, she was more explicit about the pressure her mother in particular had exerted on her, and reasoned about the motives behind this behavior:

[…] my mother has two brothers who are doctors and she’s a nurse herself, but she carries a bitterness toward her own father because he made it clear that the sons could become doctors, but he said, I don’t know if it was explicit or implicit, but women can’t become doctors. So, it wasn’t even an option, but nurse was. And my mother is just as smart and talented as my uncles, so she carries this bitterness that they were allowed to become something good while she became a nurse, and then she became a burnt-out nurse and her whole life went to ruin because of her choice of profession, in that way. So, her bitterness is immense around this theme... yes. On so many levels.

Reflecting on their parents’ views, choices, and motives could also entail recognizing their parents’ opinions, especially criticism or concern, about the participant and their life choices. At age 29, Gustav described his parents as positive or neutral concerning his life choices, while at 33 he mentioned several instances of his mother being opinionated about how he should live his life. For example, when describing their respective views on his time being single, he said:

Still to this day I can look back on that time alone and think that it was a hell of a great time, you know. My mom can’t understand that because she just thought that I was isolated at home, basically.

The development toward seeing more of the persons behind their parents could also involve expressing a more understanding and forgiving attitude toward them regarding aspects they were critical of, or had been in the past. This could mean acknowledging limiting circumstances and factors that might have influenced their parents’ actions, for example in the parental role, while recognizing good intentions they shared with them. In gaining greater understanding for their parents’ shortcomings, some participants also seemed to become more aware of their own flaws, and the fact that they might not be all that different from those of their parents. Patrik was critical of the traditional gender roles his parents had enacted during his upbringing, which involved his father working long hours and being away from the family a great deal. However, at the time of the second interview he had become a father himself, and reflected on his own work–family priorities:

Maybe in a way I’m repeating [the pattern]; I mean, my father couldn’t see it as a possibility that he’d be at home as much as my mother. And I can’t see it as a possibility that I could work part-time. Maybe I’m just as narrow-minded as he was, but in a different way.

Some participants themselves perceived that they had shifted their attitudes toward their parents on certain issues, and reflected back on their development from being more critical of them to more understanding:

Anna: I’ve kind of thought sometimes, maybe like in my teens, that I’ll definitely be a better parent than my parents are [laughs]. Yeah, you know. And then when you grow up more and more and more, you realize that they’ve really done a great job [laughs]. So, in that way I’ve thought a bit differently […]

Interviewer: Can you remember what you thought or how you thought about it?

Anna: That I’ll like, I’ll be a perfect parent [laughs]. And that… Yeah. I think that was it.

Interviewer: You didn’t have any thoughts on how to be a perfect parent?

Anna: No, I don’t really remember how I thought about that. Like unconditional love, for your children. But my parents had that too, but I guess [laughs]. I guess it wasn’t always that it felt that way in my teens.

At age 33 after progressing to identity achievement, some of the participants coded to this theme thus seemed to look at their parents from a more empathetic point of view. This development involved recognizing shared values and ambitions, as well as flaws, resulting in the participants expressing a newfound sense of understanding for their parents and their actions.

Finding Greater Independence in Relation to One’s Parents

This final theme describes a development among the participants toward relating to their parents, and their parents’ influence on them, with greater independence and agency at age 33 after progressing to the identity achievement status. At age 29 when coded as foreclosed, some participants referred a great deal to their childhood and how their parents’ life choices had affected them while growing up. These participants seemed to relate to questions regarding, for instance, work and family life more in terms of their parents’ views and choices rather than their own. For most of them, this involved describing positive aspects of their parents’ impact, but some focused mainly on negative childhood experiences. However, regardless of their attitudes toward their parents, the role of son or daughter appeared to be central to the identity narratives of these participants, and their parents a highly influential presence in their lives.

At age 33, the participants in this theme focused less on childhood memories and the voices of their parents were less prevalent in their identity narratives. Instead, they placed more emphasis on their own life and what they wanted for themselves in the present and future. For the participants who had previously spoken about their parents as role models, this could involve stating things they wanted to do differently from their parents. The following statements by Christian reflect an awareness of his parents’ influence on him at age 29, while remaining relatively unquestioning and passive in regard to this influence. At 33, Christian instead described his parents’ relationship in less positive terms, and stated that he wanted to be more involved in household work than his father had been:

Well, mine [thoughts about romantic relationships] are quite seriously influenced by theirs, I would assume. Because, well, it more or less seems from my perspective that I’ve modelled my thoughts, or well, that my thoughts have been modelled after their relationship. I mean, I had a damn happy childhood, so I mean, it worked well for them, right; so yeah, if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. (Christian, age 29)

I’ve observed how they, their dynamics have worked, and there are at least parts that I don’t want in a relationship of my own. But I mean, it’s just made me aware that, yeah, that worked out badly and I don’t want that. I have to do better on that one. (Christian, age 33)

For the participants who had described negative aspects of their childhood at 29, their development at 33 involved shifting the focus from what their parents had done right or wrong in the past toward how to do better themselves in the present and future. For example, Pernilla talked at both interviews about her parents’ dysfunctional relationship during her upbringing, but at 33, she was more focused on how these experiences had translated into strong values of her own:

[…] ever since I was little, I’ve understood that this isn’t the way it should be. And I’d never ever live in an unhealthy relationship where we, if [partner] and I were to reach a point in life where we felt that the other person is annoying me more than making me feel good, then I’d absolutely end it quickly. Because the children shouldn’t have to be around that and it’s not possible to fake it.

Although the participants centered their narratives less around their parents at 33 they still recognized their parents’ influence on them, but seemed to relate to them with greater independence and agency. For example, Tobias had described his parents as strong role models at age 29 and spoke in detail about how his parents had organized their family life growing up. During the time between interviews, he had met his partner and started a family together with her. At age 33, he still acknowledged his parents’ influence on his views on parenting, but described a process of integrating these elements with other influences, thus creating a view that was his own:

I want to pass on my values. I think my dad once said… you know, this thing that you pick the things you appreciate about your own parents and pass it on. And I guess that’s sort of the attitude [I have]. I mean, the perfect person doesn’t exist; or well, it’s very subjective. I take with me what I value as positive from my parents and try to incorporate that. But then it gets influenced by my partner, so we create a new model for our children and that… Well, so create the best possible conditions, right? [laughs].

Some participants reflected on their own development toward finding greater independence in relation to their parents, and described how this process came to be. This could involve recognizing and letting go of previously held idealized views on their parents. For example, at 33, Patrik looked back on having been heavily influenced by his parents in his views on work and romantic relationships. Now being a parent himself and leading a life more similar to that of his parents, he paradoxically felt that he could think more independently about what he wanted for his life:

I mean you’re so incredibly shaped by what you’ve grown up in. I mean, of course my parents, who have always been married as long as I’ve existed and still are, they’ve of course set the standard; of course I’ve always thought that I should live that way without even reflecting on it. I think that, in the same way I said earlier about work, I think it’s the same in this area that it’s not until now when you’re 33 and have a child and an apartment and a bunch of stuff together and a partner. It’s not until now that you start to reflect on the fact that “alright, maybe life doesn’t have to look like this either,” you know, and it’s taken just as long to realize that. Which is nice, because then it’s like it’s much more your own choice, that you choose to live in it because it’s not like it would be impossible not to live in it.

As seen in this extract, becoming aware of how one’s parents had represented a normative way of living opened up the possibility to choose a different life for oneself, and a sense of liberation. For Jenny, negative experiences from her childhood had made her question whether to become a parent herself. At age 33, she described how her therapist had helped her gain new perspective on this topic and make a decision based on her own wishes rather than fear:

As I remember it, at that time it wasn’t at all a given to me and it was anxiety-ridden for many years, um, also due to my own history that if I turn out like my mother, I don’t want to expose my child to that, so then I don’t know if I should become a parent. That’s how the thoughts went. But then I went to this CBT therapy for a few months and it also came up as a theme, and then he said so wisely and it’s really, it’s kind of what also turned my thoughts around, that “all people make mistakes; first of all, no one is flawless, not even you. And you’re so aware of the mistakes your mother made so you won’t make those mistakes, it won’t happen. However, you’ll make other mistakes, but you’ll have to live with that.” It was so, it was a real [sighs]; but it’s so obvious when you look at it like this, why couldn’t I think like that? But you can’t, and that’s what CBT is for. So, it was a real eye-opener for me. So I had to digest that for a few years and then I came to the conclusion that I probably wanted to dare [laughs], to dare it anyway and then we'll, I’m still terrified, for crying out loud, of what it’s going to be like.

As illustrated in this theme, for the participants, becoming aware of parental influences had the potential to enable more conscious choices regarding their own life. These choices could be either similar to or different from those of their parents, but they were nonetheless experienced by the participants as more authentic.

Discussion

The aim of this study was to examine changes in how established adults describe and relate to internal representations of their parents in their identity narratives as they progress from identity foreclosure (at age 29) to identity achievement (at age 33). Through a longitudinal qualitative analysis, we developed three themes describing different aspects of change: Making more reflective comparisons between oneself and one’s parents; Seeing the persons behind the parents; and Finding greater independence in relation to one’s parents. We will continue by discussing the findings mainly in relation to identity status theory and the individuation literature, as well as the developmental phase of established adulthood.

Changes in Parental Representations from Foreclosure to Identity Achievement

The findings from this study add nuance to descriptions of how individuals in the foreclosed status relate to their parents, as the results show variability in how the participants, at the outset of the study, described and related to their parental representations. The theme Making more reflective comparisons between oneself and one’s parents described that the participants tended to emphasize similarities rather than differences when they compared themselves to their parents at age 29. Similarly, the theme Finding greater independence in relation to one’s parents showed a tendency for the participants at 29 to center their identity narrative around their parents and describe them as role models. These findings are in line with descriptions of foreclosure in the identity status literature as related to idealization of and identification with figures of authority (Josselson, 1996; Kroger & Marcia, 2011; Marcia, 1966). However, the theme Finding greater independence in relation to one’s parents also showed that some individuals, when foreclosed, fixated on their parents’ mistakes and flaws rather than idealizing them. Moreover, the theme Seeing the persons behind the parents depicted how individuals may be less able or willing as foreclosed than as achieved to reflect on their parents’ inner lives. This study thus indicates that there is variability in the emotional valence attached to parental representations of foreclosed established adults and the closeness or distance expressed in relation to them. This variability has not been highlighted in previous research focusing on adolescents or emerging adults, and may reflect that certain aspects of foreclosure have been overlooked or that this identity status takes on more multifaceted forms in adulthood.

Another possible explanation for the observed variations in parental representations when coded to the foreclosed status is that, at the time of the first interview, the participants were in different phases of their development toward identity achievement. Kroger (1995) found that individuals who remained in the foreclosed status over a two-year period (i.e., “firm” foreclosure) demonstrated a stronger need for nurturance from or closeness to parental figures, compared to individuals who transitioned from foreclosure to achievement during the same period (i.e., “developmental” foreclosure). In the same vein, focusing on separation from an internalized other has been described as a possible step in the process of transitioning from foreclosure to achievement (Kroger, 2003), and de-idealization of one’s parents has been linked to the achieved identity status (Frank et al., 1990). Although all participants in the present study had transitioned to identity achievement at the second interview, thus proving to be “developmental” foreclosures, it is possible that participants expressing a more critical, distant attitude toward their parents at the first interview were further along in the process toward independent exploration and definition of their identity.

The findings from this study highlight several aspects of change in the participants description of their parents as they had progressed to the identity achievement status at age 33. The theme Finding greater independence in relation to one’s parents showed that the participants seemed to relate to the influence of their parents with greater independence and agency at age 33 after having progressed to the identity achievement status. This theme also described how participants, as identity achieved, integrated elements from their parents with other influences into something new, an integration that resembles “…the synthesis of childhood identifications in the individual’s own terms…” (p. 186), which Marcia (1964) describes as a key outcome of identity exploration. The results from this study thus align with basic assumptions in the identity status literature about the transition from foreclosure to achievement involving the examination and synthesis of parental influences into an identity that is more independently formulated (Marcia, 1964, 1966, 1967).

Importantly, however, the participants’ development toward greater independence did not equal a rejection of their parents or a denial of their parents’ influence on them. Rather, the present study showed that parents still appear to be an important point of reference for established adults in identity achievement when defining who they are and what is important to them in their lives, as seen in the theme Making more reflective comparisons between oneself and one’s parents. This point was further highlighted in the theme Seeing the persons behind the parents, which showed that progressing from foreclosure to achievement may be associated with being more understanding and forgiving of one’s parents, and perceiving their individuality more than one had before. These findings map onto descriptions of individuation as a process of refining views about the self as well as others (Allison & Sabatelli, 1988; Josselson, 1988), and support previous research linking identity achievement with an increased capacity for both independence from and closeness to others (Frank et al., 1990; Josselson, 1982; Kroger, 1990; Orlofsky & Frank, 1986).

Taken together, the results from this study show that the progression from identity foreclosure to achievement is associated with several changes in how individuals describe and relate to internal representations of their parents. These changes involve increased complexity and flexibility in representations of both oneself and one’s parents, which is in line with previous research on individuation processes expected to occur when one is transitioning from foreclosure to achievement in adolescence or emerging adulthood (e.g., Koepke & Denissen, 2012; Kroger, 2003). In addition, the findings also highlight variability in how foreclosed established adults relate to their parents, and how parents seem to function as a point of reference (among others) in their continued exploration and definition of the self as they progress from foreclosure to identity achievement. In the next section, we will discuss how these results can be understood in the context of the developmental phase of established adulthood.

Individuation and Identity Development in Established Adulthood

Why are the changes in parental representations and identity observed in this study taking place for the participants in their early thirties? In line with suggestions by Colarusso (2000), one hypothesis is that they may have been sparked by normative life events related to the developmental phase of established adulthood, such as marriage, parenthood, and role transitions at work. In the present study, several of the participants had committed to a long-term relationship and become parents between the interviews. The increased reflection around and independence from their parents observed in this study may reflect how questions regarding family life had become more urgent and personally relevant to these participants, which might have compelled them to explore and articulate their own point of view. Josselson (1996) also noted that a stable relationship, an established career, or some other source of security not rooted in the family of origin may be necessary for individuals in foreclosure to dare explore their identities. Moreover, taking on adult roles and responsibilities in established adulthood may also mean leading a life that is more similar to that of one’s parents, which might facilitate the development toward making more reflective comparisons between oneself and one’s parents as well as being more understanding of them, which was seen in this study. Thus, life changes and roles transitions associated with established adulthood seem to be a potential trigger for identity and individuation processes in established adulthood, a trigger that could operate in multiple ways. This highlights the psychosocial nature of identity development described by Erikson (1968), and how issues of identity, intimacy, and generativity may intersect in adulthood.

More disruptive life events could potentially also spark the type of changes in parental representations and identity observed in this study. Josselson (1996) noted in her study that the women who were assessed as foreclosed in their twenties usually did not reassess their views of themselves or their families of origin until they had encountered some major challenge in their lives which forced them to envision their lives in a new way. In the present study, two of the participants explicitly mentioned therapy as a turning point in their views of themselves in relation to their parents. Other participants had experienced their parents’ divorce between the interviews or one of their parents passing away. Examining in more detail how such major life events and transitions in different generations of the extended family system interact with individual identity development would be a valuable step forward toward gaining a more contextualized understanding of identity development through a life span perspective.

When interpreting the findings, we must also recognize the specificity of the sociocultural context within which the participants, and we as researchers, are situated. Extensive welfare systems in countries such as Sweden allow established adults to live their lives independently from their parents, with the state providing sufficient care for their children as well as their aging parents (e.g., Bordone et al., 2017; Brandt & Deindl, 2013). This independence is to some extent considered normative in the majority culture of Sweden, which in cross-cultural comparisons has been said to be characterized by individualistic values and beliefs (Davis & Williamson, 2020). In the present study, such values and beliefs can be seen in the emphasis on personal choice that runs throughout the themes, as well as the criticism expressed by some participants in regard to their parents, which highlights how the thoughts and feelings of the individual are prioritized over conformity to social groups. Studying the processes found in this study in other cultural contexts would add valuable knowledge about the influence of different social policies and cultural norms concerning the parent–child relationship.

Limitations and Future Directions

The qualitative design of this study, which used data from two time points from individuals with a shared identity status development, was appropriate for the study’s explorative purpose but limits the types of inferences that can be made based on the results. Although the results point toward some kind of relationship between life events, identity development, and individuation processes, the exact sequencing or dynamics of these factors cannot be determined based on the results from this study as we only have data from two time points spread four years apart. To address these issues of causality, future research may benefit from examining the processes found in the present study in a broader sample of individuals representing different types of identity status trajectories with shorter intervals between interviews. Moreover, using an interview with a more explicit focus on life events, such as the Life Story Interview (McAdams, 2008), could provide a more in depth understanding of the role of such events.

The selection of our sample based on their global, categorical, identity status assessment comes with both strengths and limitations. Although the participants in our sample shared a common developmental trajectory, which is strengthened by the study’s findings showing common patterns and themes among them, there is an important variability between these individuals that is not captured by global status assessments. First, while the coding is categorical (Marcia et al., 1993), participants may vary in the degree to which they fit with a foreclosed or achieved status. Second, domain-specific status assessments can differ from the global rating, meaning that some participants may not have been coded as having progressed from foreclosed to achieved in all domains. However, given the lack of previous research on the topic, we determined that examining the participants’ development in broad strokes rather than on a detailed, domain-specific level would yield the most valuable results at this point. This approach also seemed the most feasible in light of previous research indicating that the foreclosed and achieved statuses represent two structurally different modes of viewing oneself and the world (Kroger, 2003), and thus could be best represented by utilizing global, rather than domain-specific, identity status assessments. With that said, we believe that examining parents’ role in adult identity development in relation to specific life domains (such as occupation, romantic relationships, parenthood, etc.) would be a valuable next step that might show parents to be more central to the development in some areas than others, and in different ways.

Conclusions and Implications

The results from this study highlight the continued importance of parents in adult identity development, and how progressing from identity foreclosure to achievement in established adulthood may involve increased complexity in representations of both oneself and one’s parents. These findings support the idea that individuation is interrelated with processes of identity development, and bridge some of the gap between the identity status and individuation literature by elucidating how these processes manifest and intertwine in the identity narratives of established adults. The results also suggest that the exploration of oneself and representations of one’s parents can be seen as mutually influential processes: It seems that knowing more about yourself can help you understand your parents, and that knowing more about your parents can help you understand yourself. Moreover, the results indicate how life events, normative as well as disruptive, could spark these change processes in established adulthood. These results have clinical implications in the sense that they highlight the continued relevance of reflecting on one’s parents for established adult clients struggling with identity-related issues. Similarly, for established adults struggling with strained relationships with their parents, reflecting on identity-related issues in a therapeutic setting may be a step toward gaining greater understanding for them.